Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 2 Mar 1933

Vol. 46 No. 3

In Committee on Finance. - Vote 57—Railways (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £15,860 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1933, for payments under the Railways Act, 1924, the Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, 1883, etc., and for other purposes connected with Irish Transport. (Minister for Finance.)

The Minister for Industry and Commerce in his speech yesterday afternoon furnished the House with a very clear and detailed explanation of the negotiations which were carried on between himself and the trade unions on the one hand and the directors of the railway companies on the other, and the circumstances which led up to the proposal made by the Government for the payment of a subsidy to maintain wages during a particular period.

The Minister, however, did not give the House any reason why the subsidy was withdrawn in so far as it affected the employees of cross-Border companies. I was glad to hear the Minister say that the Government take full responsibility for the payment of the subsidy. Personally, I would not be a party to any proposal which would call upon the taxpayers to provide a subsidy for a public company unless the Government which was making such an offer on behalf of the taxpayers was prepared to take some share of control in the company deriving benefit from the subsidy.

I want to object to the payment of any portion of this subsidy to the Great Northern Company or the County Donegal Joint Railway Company. The Minister gave a fairly full report of the circumstances which led up to the strike now proceeding. There have been several national railway strikes and partial national railway strikes since 1911. In the course of those strikes it was customary for the unions representing the different sections of employees in the railway industry to consider separately what course they would take in case any one union decided to take strike action. On some occasions all the members of particular railway unions went on strike. On other occasions some of the railway staff and members of railway trade unions did not go on strike. That applied particularly to the clerical staffs and the stationmasters. Whenever the clerical staffs and the stationmasters on the Irish railways did not take strike action they were never asked to do any work other than the work on which they were normally engaged. I remember, on one or two occasions, general managers calling members of the clerical staffs and inviting them to do work other than that on which they were normally engaged. In all cases the men refused and no action of any kind was taken as a result of their refusal.

In the case of the existing strike, action of an unprecedented nature has been taken by the management of the Great Northern Railway and by the County Donegal Railways Joint Committee. One or two days after the strike commenced the manager of the County Donegal Railways called upon a certain stationmaster in Donegal to do a signalman's work. The stationmaster rightly refused to do it and he was instantly dismissed. A clerk employed at the same station also refused to do the work and he, too, was sent home. Such action has been unheard of in the case of any railway company where the employees took strike action. At least that is my own experience, and I do not think that such action is within the knowledge of anyone concerned with railway trade unions. In or about the same time the management of the Great Northern Railway Company, through the agency of a man who was born in Scotland and worked most of his time in China and who was called here to mismanage the Great Northern Railways, called members of the clerical staff to the traffic manager's office at the headquarters in Belfast. I may say, in passing, that that is a most unusual thing. The individuals who were invited to attend were asked to do work other than that upon which they were normally employed. They were invited to do work for which, as it was described on paper, of which they were physically capable; in other words, they were asked to go out on lorries driven by blacklegs and undertake the work of loading and unloading those lorries. They refused to do that and they were sent home and told that their services would no longer be required.

That policy in effect means that this particular company will be in a position to use money for the purpose of forcing people to do work which they were never previously called upon to do. I take very strong exception to the payment of any money to a railway company that carries on a policy of that kind. The Great Northern Railway Company and the County Donegal Joint Railways Joint Committee, which is partly owned by the Great Northern Railway, are well known for the niggardly way in which they treat their staff. The Great Northern Company, in particular, is well known for the small share of employment it gives to Catholics in the Twenty-Six or the Six Counties. That fact is known to Deputies representing the areas covered by the Great Northern Railway.

I raise this matter by way of protest against the policy recently initiated by the companies and in the hope that the Minister will make some representations to the directors or officers of the companies concerned. I am aware that the Minister for Industry and Commerce has been, and perhaps still is, in close touch with some of the directors and officials of these companies. I hope he will take an early opportunity to enter an emphatic protest against the policy now being pursued, and that he will see to it that no favour that can be granted by this House in future will be granted to any company that carries on a policy of that kind. One of the Great Northern directors recently appointed, a very able man, is the ex-secretary of the Department over which the Minister now presides. He is supposed to hold, and in my hearing has given expression to, very democratic views on many matters. I invite Deputies, and particularly those who represent constituencies like Donegal and Monaghan, where some of the men who have been victimised are living, to say what they think of the companies responsible for the victimisation. I understand that within the last twenty-four hours one of the men dismissed from Glenties station in County Donegal has been told by his general manager, in language not very polite, to get out at once from the house he occupied while acting as stationmaster. I hope the Donegal and Monaghan Deputies will deal with this matter, and I hope that the Fianna Fáil Deputies particularly will impress on the Minister the desirability of giving no further favours to any company responsible for this type of victimisation.

The reason why the subsidy was withdrawn from companies operating cross-Border services as from January 30th was because the strike commenced on that day and the subsidy was offered with a view to preventing the strike. The circumstances that occasioned the strike arose, as Deputies are aware, outside the Saorstat. But the situation was such that it was apparently considered necessary that the strike should extend over the whole systems of the companies concerned on either side of the Border; the stoppage of work was occasioned by the strike, and the period for which the subsidy was given or devoted. Consequently the subsidy ceased to be payable. On the other matters mentioned by the Deputy, I am quite clear in my mind as to what is the right course for us to take. I have received complaints similar to those voiced by the Deputy. I also received certain rebutting statements from the Great Northern Railway Company. I have not had any information as to the position concerning the County Donegal Railways to which the Deputy referred.

The facts are, however, that the period for which the subsidy is payable terminated on January 30th. An agreement was made between the railway companies and my Department that they would pay to their workers in the Saorstát the same rate of wages as prevailed prior to the war and that the difference would be made good to them by the State. It is clear that the railway companies get no pecuniary benefit at all from the subsidy. The full amount that will be payable to the Great Northern Railway Company and to the other companies has been already expended by them in the form of wages to their employees.

The incident to which the Deputy refers and of which he complains took place subsequent to the 30th January, the day on which the subsidy terminated. I do not think, in view of these facts, that we would be justified at all in taking action which would be contrary to the agreement entered into between the Department of Industry and Commerce and the railway companies. The majority of the incidents of which the Deputy complains and the only ones on which I believe I will be unable to get positive information took place in the Six Counties. There had been no such incidents in the Saorstát portions of the Great Northern Railway system. And as I mentioned I have no information about one or two incidents of that kind which are stated to have taken place in Donegal, but any information available about these will find its way to me. The circumstances are such that it would be altogether unjustifiable for us in the light of these circumstances to refuse to make payments which we agreed to make. Consequently I think this money should be made available by the Dáil. The subsidy is payable to the Great Northern Railway Company where there is no strike and will only then be payable.

I quite agree; and I have not asked the Minister to break any agreement which he has already honourably entered into, but I think it is not unfair to ask him to assure the House that no legislative favours or favours of any kind will be given by this House to a company that insists upon pursuing a policy of this kind. I trust the Minister will take the earliest possible opportunity of making representations to the company for the purpose of getting them to withdraw from the position they have taken up.

I should like to see where that undertaking would lead to. At any rate no favours will be given to this or any company until the matter has been discussed here in the House so that the Deputy will then have an opportunity of placing his views before the Dail.

Does the Minister realise that the action of the company in victimising people because they will not do the work of people on strike is introducing new features into a dispute between employer and employees? Will the Minister give consideration to that aspect of the question? Perhaps he will give this matter sympathetic consideration by pointing out to these companies that this is not a feature which the Government encourages, but that it is a matter which it rather discourages.

The facts as far as the Great Northern Railway Company are concerned are contradicted by them. Obviously it is not open to me to carry out any investigations of incidents taking place in the Six Counties. I have no information at all concerning the Great Northern. As far as the Donegal incidents are concerned there is, in the first place, a conflict of testimony, a conflict which I am not in a position to resolve even if I had functions in the matter.

Supposing definite information is furnished to the Minister on the matter corroborating the statements made by Deputies in this House, will he take steps to make representations to the railway company on the matter?

It is clearly understood that I have no functions in the matter and no powers to compel the company to take any action of that kind.

But if the action of the Great Northern Railway Company produces in this country the same kind of reactions which certain reactionary employers sought to have brought about here in 1913, will the Minister take serious notice of that development?

Undoubtedly so. The services of the Department of Industry and Commerce will always be available for making arrangements that will prevent disputes of that kind arising in the Saorstát.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share